swamplizard

Yer welcome, fine reptile!

a-men-and-women to that one Brother!

Big breath!

thanks for your posts

There was once a lizard named Jim
Who danced to the tune of a whim
Both scaly and furry
(Of course, metaphorically) < make that rhyme somehow
He enjoyed a daily paradoxical swim.

You're most welcome, t'is always a joy to see another who is aware that the 'real' is on the other side of mental construct. :namaste

Many thanks for the birthday wishes. And I thank you kindly for the creative outlet.

of crusty frubal

How does 2012 find you, dancey one?

i made it!!!
thank you for your thoughtful words

I'm kind of glad I'm not going off on some random distorted version of Pseudo-Taoism.
I'm surprised a version of Taoism like what we share an opinion on has not appeared, actually. There's a form of Religious Confucianism was exists (which is awesome!), so I wonder why not Taoism like this, but instead has its local gods with an unworshippable, unachievable force with which harmony can be attained..

Thank you swampy. It means a lot. :namaste

I think it does.

Many people still wrongly conceive God as meaning "angry magic man in sky with thunderbolt in hand" and can't understand God as more than that. Many people still cling to over-anthromorphised and ultra-personal conceptions of Divinity.

These, as we can understand, cannot be conflated with the Tao. The Tao is waaaay beyond such things. However, some people, and religions, teach God is the all beyond everything, that universal, One force. What the difference is, in my opinion, is small.

However, some people seem to claim things I don't think are the case with Taoism; for example, people saying the Tao is the "unconscious" kind of impersonal. It's ironic, really, The Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao, and all, yet some people presume to know its nature. To me, when reading the TTC, it seems like it is spoken of in an almost personal way, yet if this is metaphor or not, or wrong by the authors, I do not know or presume to know.

Thoughts?

Can you elaborate please?

Very welcome. I see the Tao in a similar way. Not a human-made, anthromorphic concept of God, but something.. else.

I don't speak Chinese, but chapter 4 says:

&#21566; &#19981; &#30693; &#35841; &#20043; &#23376; &#65292; &#35937; &#24093; &#20043; &#20808; &#12290; Trad. Chinese.
&#21566; &#19981; &#30693; &#35504; &#20043; &#23376; &#65292; &#35937; &#24093; &#20043; &#20808; &#12290; Simp. Chinese.

The last line in Google translate, well, doesn't really say "It is older than God".

I ran the terms under an online translator:

&#35937; xiàng shape; form; appearance; elephant; image under a map (math.
&#24093; dì emperor
&#20043; zh&#299; (literary equivalent of &#30340; (subor. part.); him; her; it


&#20808; xi&#257;n early; prior; former; in advance; first


What would you make of this? Do you think the translators are being too.. loose with the translation?

Aww, thank you so much for your kind comments! You are too sweet... I only know that God is so big, it's hard not to notice Him in different places! Ekam sat vipra bahudha vadanti...

Which one? It seems that I have a few right now... XD

Yes sir very awesome

Very welcome, brother.
Hope you're having a good Christmas, if you celebrate it, and a good day if not.

new laptop!!